Worst aircraft of WW2?

[Vassili Zaitzev]

I'd say the F2A Brewster buffalo is one of the worst aircraft in WW2, at least in the battle of Midway. After the vicious dogfight near midway in which the Marine fighter squadron VMF-221 was decimated, one of the surviving pilots said. " Anyone who goes up in a Buffalo should be chalked off as dead even before they enter combat". that tells ya something.

[Vassili Zaitzev]

I'd say the F2A Brewster buffalo is one of the worst aircraft in WW2, at least in the battle of Midway. After the vicious dogfight near midway in which the Marine fighter squadron VMF-221 was decimated, one of the surviving pilots said. " Anyone who goes up in a Buffalo should be chalked off as dead even before they enter combat". that tells ya something.

[FLYBOYJ]

Tell that to these guys....
Hans Henrik Wind
Second highest scoring ace of the Finnish Air Force during second world war was Hans "Hasse" Wind.

Born: 30.7.1919 in Tammisaari. Died: 24.7.1995 in Tampere.

Score: 75 kills in 302 sorties.

Wind served first as a Leutnant and later as a Captain in Lentolaivue 24 during the Continuation War. Wind scored his first victory (a Soviet I-15bis fighter) on 27 September 1941. flying a Brewster B-239 numbered BW-367. Wind achieved total of 39 kills with the Brewsters.

The top Finnish Ace, Eino Juutilainen attained 33 of his 94 victories in the Buffalo.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

The Finnish did have some success with the Buffalo, I am still debating with myself what the worst aircraft was in my opinion. I really am not sure. I had my mind made up at one point and then I dont know anymore. Just about all major aircraft had there good points and bad points. Its tuff for me.

[Nonskimmer]

It's tough to judge based on the success of individual pilots. The Finns, like the Germans in the east, were up against largely inferior Soviet pilots, so a skilled flyer like Juutilainen in a Buffalo would chalk up a decent record anyway. Having said that, I too have no idea what the actual worst fighter was.

[102first_hussars]

Italy's Breda Ba.65 may very well have been the worst attack plane of the war.

The Nerd wrote:
The aircobra sucked, and it was ugly.

It did suck but it was not ugly, in fact it was beautiful plane.

[FLYBOYJ]

Ba.88 - any aircraft that ends it's career as a decoy has to be on the worse ever list!

[102first_hussars]

"Helldiver!" What a great name! But what a lousy airplane!
Tough to fly, poorly designed, and delivered too slowly, the Curtiss SB2C comes somewhere near the top of most lists of "Worst Aircraft of World War Two." Of course, that judgement is no reflection on the crews who had to fly "The Beast," who were as brave, skilled, and resourceful as any other pilots - perhaps more so!

The poor results of the SB2C program contributed to the decline of the once-great Curtiss aircraft manufacturing company. After WWII, the company never won any more significant military business, and eventually shrank into a specialty supplier to the industry.

[CurzonDax]

I have to agree that its has to be the Battle. The Buffalo was actually a pretty manuverable plane with a good engine but once the put all those unnessesary things like guns, armor, radios, y'know the stuff that makes a fighter a fighter, it made it suck.

As far as the Battle, I was watching a terrible movie this weekend called Flying Fortress. The end had a faux Winston voice doing a speech about how the RAF and jolly 'ol England would survive through the RAF. One of the planes that they showcased in the ending montage was the Battle, and many formations worth! Talk about a propaganda machine!

:{)

[CurzonDax]

Originally Posted by 102first_hussars

"Helldiver!" What a great name! But what a lousy airplane!
Tough to fly, poorly designed, and delivered too slowly, the Curtiss SB2C comes somewhere near the top of most lists of "Worst Aircraft of World War Two." Of course, that judgement is no reflection on the crews who had to fly "The Beast," who were as brave, skilled, and resourceful as any other pilots - perhaps more so!

The poor results of the SB2C program contributed to the decline of the once-great Curtiss aircraft manufacturing company. After WWII, the company never won any more significant military business, and eventually shrank into a specialty supplier to the industry.

In reading a few articles about

Actually I have talked to some Helldiver pilots and once all the kinks were worked out, many of them liked the Helldiver over the Dauntless. By Okinawa they were a good plane with a pretty good service record. I think the Helldiver suffered the same fate as the B-26, we only remember the bad aspects. Also the Greeks used them with great success in thier post WWII civil war.

But I am still a SBD fan!

:{)

[Parmigiano]

Well, there should be a reason why the SB2C Helldiver was nicknamed 'Son of a Bitch 2nd Class'
However she was able to take off climb and land, so it was maybe 'amongst the worst' but not the absolute worst.

[Nonskimmer]

Originally Posted by 102first_hussars

It did suck but it was not ugly, in fact it was beautiful plane.

It didn't actually suck either. It wasn't a good high altitude fighter due mainly to it's engine, but it excelled at medium to low altitudes. Reportedly, it had excellent manoeuvrability and was extremely stable and simple to fly, with excellent visibility. It was just the type of plane the Soviets were looking for. They couldn't get enough of the thing.

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by CurzonDax

Actually I have talked to some Helldiver pilots and once all the kinks were worked out, many of them liked the Helldiver over the Dauntless. By Okinawa they were a good plane with a pretty good service record. I think the Helldiver suffered the same fate as the B-26, we only remember the bad aspects. Also the Greeks used them with great success in thier post WWII civil war.

But I am still a SBD fan!

:{)

Originally Posted by Parmigiano

Well, there should be a reason why the SB2C Helldiver was nicknamed 'Son of a Bitch 2nd Class'
However she was able to take off climb and land, so it was maybe 'amongst the worst' but not the absolute worst.

I knew a Helldiver Pilot - he said the same - Cmdr. Bill Chin told me that besides the maintenance issues, it was a matter of training. Bill stated that the Helldiver was a heavy aircraft to fly but once learned was found to be sturdy and relianble. He also said it was easier to land on a carrier than a Corsair...

Originally Posted by Nonskimmer

It didn't actually suck either. It wasn't a good high altitude fighter due mainly to it's engine, but it excelled at medium to low altitudes. Reportedly, it had excellent manoeuvrability and was extremely stable and simple to fly, with excellent visibility. It was just the type of plane the Soviets were looking for. They couldn't get enough of the thing.

If the P-39 was so bad, why did the men of the 39FS, 5th AF achieve about a 1.5 to 1 kill ratio over the Japanese over Rabual with the P-39? Many notable P-38 aces got their first kills in the -39 and if you look at statistics the -39 really didn't do as bad as people may think in the Pacific.

Check Yeager said it was the best WW2 fighter he's flown!!!

[Nonskimmer]

Did I mention the success it had in the Pacific?
Good stuff, Joe.

[evangilder]

Agreed, Joe. I saw a program the other night on the military channel about Russian aviation during the great patriotic war and they said the P-39 worked well for the Russians because they typically flew it below 12,000 feet and the 37MM cannon was great fo ground attack.